September 30, 2011

Categories:

The press can’t agree on whether New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie (R) is running for president, but that hasn’t kept the media from addressing the issue of Christie’s weight.

The hype over how his physical stature could affect a presidential run was born this week in an unlikely place: ABC daytime talk show “The View,” which delved into the question “Is Chris Christie too fat to be president?”

From there, stories on Christie’s weight poured in, with perhaps the most controversial piece coming Friday from Washington Post columnist Eugene Robinson, who had some blunt, unsolicited advice for the governor. The Pulitzer Prize winner wrote that Christie needs to “lose some weight” regardless of what he decides and concluded his column with this advice: “Eat a salad and take a walk.”

It’s certainly not the first time Christie’s weight has come under scrutiny; after being hospitalized on July 28 for experiencing difficulty breathing, he told CNN’s Piers Morgan that his weight is something he’s “really struggling” with and that he “feels a sense of guilt” about it at times.

“I actually think Chris Christie is a more viable, realistic candidate” for president because of his weight, she said, and would reflect how America in general struggles with obesity. The candid governor would address the issue “head-on,” she said.

Brezinski isn’t the only one beefing with the swell of stories. The National Review’s Greg Pollowitz called Robinson’s column “insane” and wondered (sarcastically, he notes) if similar rationalization should be used to devise a monitoring system for President Barack Obama’s smoking.

Newsbusters took issue when Al Sharpton joked on “Morning Joe” that Christie should go to jail for 90 days to lose weight as Sharpton says he did, as a result dropping 120 pounds.

“Would [Sharpton] make such a joke if Christie was a Democrat or a woman?” wrote Noel Sheppard. “Manhattan has a United States Congressman named Jerry Nadler who's served since 1992. Has there ever been this kind of focus on his obesity? Or what about liberal darling Michael Moore?”

Sheppard is right about the intense focus. In addition to the Robinson column in today’s Post, Al Kamen used a barrage of clever wording while “Sizing up Gov. Christie” in the A-section, concluding “Christie, if he runs and fails, would be . . . the biggest loser.”

Perhaps the issue just gives writers a chance to flex their metaphors: Fishbowl DC highlighted a CNN story that used no less than nine bits of word play when describing the governor’s weight.

Both Kamen and Robinson’s columns were accompanied in the newspaper by photos of Obama and Christie together — images that accentuate the physical disparity between the two men. In discussing the rationalization behind media outlets such as The New York Times writing about Christie’s weight, The Atlantic used a similar photo but also took care to remind readers that publicly, Christie “has been far more open to losing weight than to running for president.”

As evidence that the topic had indeed gone viral, the Christian Science Monitor excused its writing on the subject: “Don’t blame us for bringing this up — if anything, we’re behind the bend on this one,” wrote Peter Grier.

In the face of all the noise on Christie’s weight (and potential presidential aspirations), New York Magazine wondered why anyone — even those behind the bend — writes about the governor’s weight at all.

“The only real reasoning I see here is that American elites view obesity with disgust, and they’re repulsed at the notion that a very fat guy could rise to a position of symbolic leadership. It’s not a very attractive sentiment,” wrote Jonathan Chait.

Tags:

Share this Article

Reader Comments ()

We’re currently testing the Facebook commenting system on our blogs. To find out more, please visit our FAQ. If you’d like to report spam or abuse, click the X in the upper right hand corner of the offending post. Remember, you must be logged into Facebook to comment.